OnlyBucs

14040532242428470 wrote: I disagree as they have shown they brought in pieces to help the team.  Martin, Burnett, Cervelli, Liriano, Nova, Volquez, and Kang to name a few.  They even added at the trading deadline with Morneau, Byrd, Nova, Soria, Happ, etc. 



It's like the Pirates get ridiculed for building a farm system and many home grown players who are cheap and in place. 



I say good job to the Astros, but is that because they didn't develop that many players?  They have five guys over the age of 30 starting for them.  They also have one of the best players in the game making $535K a year. 



It's nice to see the Astros rebuilt.  It wasn't long ago they were losing 100 games in multiple seasons in a row.  They had to add more to their roster (and payroll) unlike the Pirates.  They got worse after their playoff appearances too.






Let's face facts here ... all of the names you mentioned or most of them had issues when Pittsburgh acquired them or signed them.  They weren't top flight performers.  They were guys looking to re-establish their careers.  Most of those guys didn't have much value when we got them.  So, its not like we went out and got guys trending in the right direction with their careers.  The only thing is most of those guys did re-establish themselves.  When the deals were made, they were meh?  No one thought most of those names would do much of anything.  Pittsburgh was lucky.  Those weren't pieces that you could honestly say would be of serious help at the time.
That's right. No one is saying the Pirates never add players. But when was the last time they obtained a productive veteran they knew they could plug into the lineup and be an impact player. I think Russell Martin was such a player because they knew he would be a big improvement over rod Barajas. But Cervelli was just a replacement for Martin rather than additional improvement to the roster. Burnett was 35 and coming off 2 5+ ERA years with NY. Volquez and Liriano were a reclamation projects. The 2013 Bucs finally were winners but were weak at 1B and SS and struggled with Locke and Morton. They waited until late August to rent Byrd and Morneau for a month so those deals cost them very little. The following year, still in need of a 1B man, they only went as far as Ike Davis and still didn't replace Locke or Morton. Kang was a nice acquisition for 2015 but they still didn't replace Locke or Morton. They lucked out with Happ, whose acquisition didn't excite anyone when it was announced. That was a good year (98 wins) but they "built" on that by trying to get by with Jaso at 1B, Vogelsong, Niese and, again, Locke. These were the types of players who kept the payroll from significantly increasing. And of course this year there was no effort to replace the bats of Kang and Marte. Have they ever added players? Of course. Do they assess the areas of need and move up from the bottom of MLB payrolls to obtain impact players who can be expected to significantly improve the team (as opposed to hoping a reclamation project works out)? Still waiting on that.

I pointed out they did spend money. I pointed out they could have had a much lower payroll. Why did they sign those guys who made the payroll higher if they don't care about winning and just want to be cheap? They did the opposite. They spent money and won. They didn't have to do that. They could have not spent anything and brought in many league minimum players.



It's funny how their moves are lucky. Because you (in general) didn't like the moves, they got lucky. Yet, these guys get paid big money to make these moves based on their knowledge. These players all made impacts and the team won. Why is it considered lucky and not smart moves?



Huntington said they wanted Nova and he was the best pitcher on the market. I doubt Huntington was like "meh" after that signing. He was correct, but now he just got lucky?

7B70787471706B2E285F667E777070317C701F0 wrote: I pointed out they did spend money. I pointed out they could have had a much lower payroll. Why did they sign those guys who made the payroll higher if they don't care about winning and just want to be cheap?  They did the opposite.  They spent money and won. They didn't have to do that. They could have not spent anything and brought in many league minimum players.



It's funny how their moves are lucky. Because you (in general) didn't like the moves, they got lucky. Yet, these guys get paid big money to make these moves based on their knowledge. These players all made impacts and the team won. Why is it considered lucky and not smart moves? 



Huntington said they wanted Nova and he was the best pitcher on the market. I doubt Huntington was like "meh" after that signing. He was correct, but now he just got lucky?


Oh boy they spent some money! As if they could have not spent any money at all. This ownership spends just enough to be able to say they spent some and not a nickel more as their bottom 5 payroll in spite of being a mid-revenue team clearly attests.



The off-season after a 98 win season they spent money on Ryan Vogelsong for their starting rotation. They were subtracting Happ, Burnett and Morton from that 98 win rotation and they spent chump change on Ryan Vogelsong while not spending money to sign the likes of Happ, Wright, Greinke or a dozen or so other FA pitchers who were better than Vogelsong. Oh they also spent money on Jon Niese but they unloaded Walker so was it spending or saving money? They dumped Morton and spent his salary on.....still waiting.



After last season they lost a combined 30+ home runs and 90+ rbi from their bench in Rodriguez and Joyce. What did they spend on their bench to try to make up for that loss?



There's a big difference between spending some money and spending enough money to improve the team by addressing obvious on the field needs. This ownership consistently does the former and not the latter. 

5B7F6B63660A0 wrote: I pointed out they did spend money. I pointed out they could have had a much lower payroll. Why did they sign those guys who made the payroll higher if they don't care about winning and just want to be cheap?  They did the opposite.  They spent money and won. They didn't have to do that. They could have not spent anything and brought in many league minimum players.



It's funny how their moves are lucky. Because you (in general) didn't like the moves, they got lucky. Yet, these guys get paid big money to make these moves based on their knowledge. These players all made impacts and the team won. Why is it considered lucky and not smart moves? 



Huntington said they wanted Nova and he was the best pitcher on the market. I doubt Huntington was like "meh" after that signing. He was correct, but now he just got lucky?


Oh boy they spent some money! As if they could have not spent any money at all. This ownership spends just enough to be able to say they spent some and not a nickel more as their bottom 5 payroll in spite of being a mid-revenue team clearly attests.



The off-season after a 98 win season they spent money on Ryan Vogelsong for their starting rotation. They were subtracting Happ, Burnett and Morton from that 98 win rotation and they spent chump change on Ryan Vogelsong while not spending money to sign the likes of Happ, Wright, Greinke or a dozen or so other FA pitchers who were better than Vogelsong. Oh they also spent money on Jon Niese but they unloaded Walker so was it spending or saving money? They dumped Morton and spent his salary on.....still waiting.



After last season they lost a combined 30+ home runs and 90+ rbi from their bench in Rodriguez and Joyce. What did they spend on their bench to try to make up for that loss?



There's a big difference between spending some money and spending enough money to improve the team by addressing obvious on the field needs. This ownership consistently does the former and not the latter. 




Quail - you have managed to say what I've tried but failed to say for the past 18 months or so. You have articulated the truth that keeps getting buried behind "lies, damned lies and statistics".



Of course the Pirates spend money. Of course they sign players.  But those truths creates lies to hide behind when discussing the fitness of this ownership to run a baseball team within the spirit of competitive sports.



I go back to a simple statement that Maine made the other day. (paraphrasing): the actions of the ownership and FO opens a legitimate concern about the true motives of ownership. 



This ownership does NOT attempt to compete within its means to field the best possible team.  And no lies, damn lies or statistics will absolve ownership of this truth.  

Serious question here...what's the point?  I mean, those who are claiming the team doesn't spend any money and is cheap (and, frankly, I agree with you...I tend to support the FO, and I hardly lay blame at their feet for Kang, Marte, and Taillon...but it's clear that this team is deficient and they are not spending sufficient money commensurate with their stadium, attendance figures, market size, and TV deals), what's the point?



Are we just venting?  Are we trying to pressure Nutting into spending more money?  Are we trying to pressure him into selling the team?



I only ask because, personally, I've never seen any value in venting just to vent.  If people need to do it, fine, but I like to have an actual plan to accomplish an objective.  So, that's my question.  What's the objective here?  And once we identify the objective, how do we go about accomplishing it?



If there is no objective, and we just throw up our hands and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do.  I'm not Bob Nutting or in the Pirates FO," then fine.  I can live with that.  But let's call it what it is...venting just to vent.



Don't mean for this to come off the wrong way...I sincerely want to know.

7F77744355705758360 wrote: Serious question here...what's the point?  I mean, those who are claiming the team doesn't spend any money and is cheap (and, frankly, I agree with you...I tend to support the FO, and I hardly lay blame at their feet for Kang, Marte, and Taillon...but it's clear that this team is deficient and they are not spending sufficient money commiserate with their stadium, attendance figures, market size, and TV deals), what's the point?



Are we just venting?  Are we trying to pressure Nutting into spending more money?  Are we trying to pressure him into selling the team?



I only ask because, personally, I've never seen any value in venting just to vent.  If people need to do it, fine, but I like to have an actual plan to accomplish an objective.  So, that's my question.  What's the objective here?  And once we identify the objective, how do we go about accomplishing it?



If there is no objective, and we just throw up our hands and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do.  I'm not Bob Nutting or in the Pirates FO," then fine.  I can live with that.  But let's call it what it is...venting just to vent.



Don't mean for this to come off the wrong way...I sincerely want to know.


At least for me it is at least partially driven because many think the team is trying its best to win and just falling short. I find that almost as frustrating as the team and go back to when I was becoming a fan and reading baseball magazines in the 1970's.



I soon realized after a couple seasons that many of the magazines were written in a way to show that every team was going to be greatly improved from the previous year (rosy glasses outlook). I think Fangraphs, and current sources and articles are more realistic about teams and their chances of winning.

765051465040330 wrote: Serious question here...what's the point?  I mean, those who are claiming the team doesn't spend any money and is cheap (and, frankly, I agree with you...I tend to support the FO, and I hardly lay blame at their feet for Kang, Marte, and Taillon...but it's clear that this team is deficient and they are not spending sufficient money commiserate with their stadium, attendance figures, market size, and TV deals), what's the point?



Are we just venting?  Are we trying to pressure Nutting into spending more money?  Are we trying to pressure him into selling the team?



I only ask because, personally, I've never seen any value in venting just to vent.  If people need to do it, fine, but I like to have an actual plan to accomplish an objective.  So, that's my question.  What's the objective here?  And once we identify the objective, how do we go about accomplishing it?



If there is no objective, and we just throw up our hands and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do.  I'm not Bob Nutting or in the Pirates FO," then fine.  I can live with that.  But let's call it what it is...venting just to vent.



Don't mean for this to come off the wrong way...I sincerely want to know.


At least for me it is at least partially driven because many think the team is trying its best to win and just falling short.  I find that almost as frustrating as the team and go back to when I was becoming a fan and reading baseball magazines in the 1970's.



I soon realized after a couple seasons that many of the magazines were written in a way to show that every team was going to be greatly improved from the previous year (rosy glasses outlook).  I think Fangraphs, and current sources and articles are more realistic about teams and their chances of winning. 






OK...but again, I'd ask...to what end? I mean, no disrespect, but what's the point of convincing other posters from a practical standpoint? Is it just to win an argument, or is there a greater purpose in mind, like organizing a walkout, protest, or boycott?



Listen, I'm with you. I see from a distance the excitement around the Pens, and the Pens have won four Cups (hopefully five soon) since the Pirates last won a World Series. But people are pumped about that team. I can only imagine what the Pirates in the World Series would do for the city. Nutting has to see that, too.



I would love for him to sell the team to an owner who will actually put up the necessary capital to field a competitive team. (Leaving aside all of the arguments about spending just to spend, having younger more cost-controlled players, etc.). But I don't see that happening. Remember the article a few years ago that said, essentially, when the Nuttings own something, they own it forever?



So, here's the point...short of that happening, why all the angst? If it's to convince other fans, again, to what end? Is OBN just an extension of the sports bar? Or is there a greater purpose here? But ranting and raving on a message board surely has about as much influence on Nutting as the Notre Dame walkout will have on Trump/Pence...maybe even less.



So, concretely, what--if anything--can be done to either move Nutting to invest heavily in the team--maybe even take a financial loss--or to sell to someone who can and will?



Because personally, I'm tired. I'm tired of being a fan of this team. I'm tired of the ups and downs of a baseball season. I'm tired of being a AAAA team, and having to have everything break right to be competitive. I can tolerate a down year. Even a down five years. What I can't tolerate is not trying...and it doesn't appear to me that the Pirates are even trying to field a competitive team right now. Honestly never thought I'd say that.



So...if we can affect some measurable change in the FO's MO, then great. I'm on board. If not, then frankly, I have far better things to do with my time. Life is too short to stress over a baseball team that is content with being the Washington Generals every year and a league that lets them do it with impunity.

424A497E684D6A650B0 wrote: Serious question here...what's the point?  I mean, those who are claiming the team doesn't spend any money and is cheap (and, frankly, I agree with you...I tend to support the FO, and I hardly lay blame at their feet for Kang, Marte, and Taillon...but it's clear that this team is deficient and they are not spending sufficient money commiserate with their stadium, attendance figures, market size, and TV deals), what's the point?



Are we just venting?  Are we trying to pressure Nutting into spending more money?  Are we trying to pressure him into selling the team?



I only ask because, personally, I've never seen any value in venting just to vent.  If people need to do it, fine, but I like to have an actual plan to accomplish an objective.  So, that's my question.  What's the objective here?  And once we identify the objective, how do we go about accomplishing it?



If there is no objective, and we just throw up our hands and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do.  I'm not Bob Nutting or in the Pirates FO," then fine.  I can live with that.  But let's call it what it is...venting just to vent.



Don't mean for this to come off the wrong way...I sincerely want to know.
Then what's the point in discussing that the team isn't very good this year? We fans can't change that. Why discuss that Cutch isn't hitting? We can't change that either. Are we supposed to formulate an actual plan to improve the defense? I'm sure Hurdle would love it because he hasn't come up with anything. Should we only discuss the final score of each game? This is a message board for discussing the Pirates. Why would we not discuss issues relevant to the team even if we can't change those things?

143934252233246467560 wrote: Serious question here...what's the point?  I mean, those who are claiming the team doesn't spend any money and is cheap (and, frankly, I agree with you...I tend to support the FO, and I hardly lay blame at their feet for Kang, Marte, and Taillon...but it's clear that this team is deficient and they are not spending sufficient money commiserate with their stadium, attendance figures, market size, and TV deals), what's the point?



Are we just venting?  Are we trying to pressure Nutting into spending more money?  Are we trying to pressure him into selling the team?



I only ask because, personally, I've never seen any value in venting just to vent.  If people need to do it, fine, but I like to have an actual plan to accomplish an objective.  So, that's my question.  What's the objective here?  And once we identify the objective, how do we go about accomplishing it?



If there is no objective, and we just throw up our hands and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do.  I'm not Bob Nutting or in the Pirates FO," then fine.  I can live with that.  But let's call it what it is...venting just to vent.



Don't mean for this to come off the wrong way...I sincerely want to know.
Then what's the point in discussing that the team isn't very good this year? We fans can't change that. Why discuss that Cutch isn't hitting? We can't change that either. Are we supposed to formulate an actual plan to improve the defense? I'm sure Hurdle would love it because he hasn't come up with anything. Should we only discuss the final score of each game? This is a message board for discussing the Pirates. Why would we not discuss issues relevant to the team even if we can't change those things?


This is what I'm trying to ascertain. So then, it is just venting to vent? OK. Fine. I'm cool with that. I just won't partake. That's all. Carry on.

775150475141320 wrote: Serious question here...what's the point?  I mean, those who are claiming the team doesn't spend any money and is cheap (and, frankly, I agree with you...I tend to support the FO, and I hardly lay blame at their feet for Kang, Marte, and Taillon...but it's clear that this team is deficient and they are not spending sufficient money commiserate with their stadium, attendance figures, market size, and TV deals), what's the point?



Are we just venting?  Are we trying to pressure Nutting into spending more money?  Are we trying to pressure him into selling the team?



I only ask because, personally, I've never seen any value in venting just to vent.  If people need to do it, fine, but I like to have an actual plan to accomplish an objective.  So, that's my question.  What's the objective here?  And once we identify the objective, how do we go about accomplishing it?



If there is no objective, and we just throw up our hands and say, "Well, there's nothing I can do.  I'm not Bob Nutting or in the Pirates FO," then fine.  I can live with that.  But let's call it what it is...venting just to vent.



Don't mean for this to come off the wrong way...I sincerely want to know.


At least for me it is at least partially driven because many think the team is trying its best to win and just falling short.  I find that almost as frustrating as the team and go back to when I was becoming a fan and reading baseball magazines in the 1970's.



I soon realized after a couple seasons that many of the magazines were written in a way to show that every team was going to be greatly improved from the previous year (rosy glasses outlook).  I think Fangraphs, and current sources and articles are more realistic about teams and their chances of winning. 






Fair question. On reflection I find that I'm motivated by the following:

1. For years I was a defender of the FO and even more Mr Nutting(I still support Neal, believing he's doing the best he can). I was so sick of the Nutting is Cheap crowd and I both approved and justified his actions and words.



He has proven (I absolutely believe) that I was wrong. The actions did not follow his words and I'm not afraid to say so. But that in the end is fairly minor. much more than that is the stunning shift of blame to the fans which I first heard in the spring of 2016. I'll admit, that ticked me off. It was not just wrong, they spoke lies. Thus has happened on more than one occasion. As much as anything I'm defending Pirate fans who responded incredibly. In this, I admit I'm venting.



2) More still when it comes to these boards is that the FO approach directly affects the team. So in this tread I'm a big believer that the only way forward is to trade a lot of our best talent. That inevitably results in someone saying we need to sit still which leads to a comment about needing to add pieces which leads to the gutter - they won't spend the necessary money. So it's actually pretty hard to discuss the team and especially the way forward without winding up at this point. Because it's a real issue.



3) which leads to EC's point and I agree with - some of the justification of the FO pushes me to the point of being crazy (probably in the same way frustration at the FO drives you and maybe others crazy).



Mostly I want to talk about what to do next and you'll see plenty of my post that are purely baseball related. I get excited talking about what can be done. Then it's pointed out that basically nothing can be done. But I'll keep advocating for a way to be competitive next year and into the future.



I would like to add one point. This is not the first time someone has expressed fatigue (or worse) at the tone of the conversation. All I can say to that is to PLEASE start new "positive" threads that are realistic. But that doesn't happened very often either.



Venting, defending, discussing in context with the team on the field - all of this is going on in different degrees at different times.